Court No. - 19
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 17652 of 2018 Petitioner :- C/M Halim Muslim Post Graduate College And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Suresh Chandra Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arvind Srivastava,Bhanu Pratap Singh,Gajendra Singh,Rohit Pandey
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
By impugned order dated 27 April 2018, the Regional Higher Education Officer, Kanpur Region, Kanpur has directed for single operation of the account of the institution till dispute in terms of order of this Court dated 13.4.2018 is decided.
By order dated 13.4.2018, this Court decided four writ petitions by a common judgement. Writ-C no. 8134 of 2018 was filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 9.2.2018, by which the earlier order dated 9.12.2016 attesting signatures of petitioner no.2, was rescinded. Another order dated 19.2.2018 was also under challenge by which the signature of the fourth respondent, Mohd. Aslam Noman was attested. The other writ petition bearing Writ-C No.60424 of 2017 was filed by Muslim Association, Kanpur through its General Secretary, Mohd. Ahmad, wherein the case set up was that petitioner no.2 herein succeeded in illegally amending the bye-laws of the Society without any intimation to the other members. The grievance in the writ petition was that the representation filed for cancelling the amendments, was not being decided. Yet another writ petition bearing Writ-C No.11371 of 2018 seeking quashing of order dated 1.9.2017 passed by the Deputy Registrar was filed by which he kept in abeyance the hearing on the objections filed by the parties against the amendments in the bye-laws on the ground that Writ-C No.31336 of 2017 has been filed before this Court challenging the amendment and wherein a counter affidavit was invited.
This Court by its judgement dated 13.4.2018 quashed the order dated 9.2.2018 and the consequential order attesting signatures of respondent no.4 on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice. The dispute relating to operation of accounts of the institution was relegated for decision by the third respondent. A further direction was issued to the Deputy Registrar to decide the challenge to the amendments made in the bye-laws.
Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned order has been passed without any notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. However, he does not dispute that since after passing of the order dated 9.2.2018, petitioner no.2 was not operating the accounts of the institution. The matter relating to operation of account is pending consideration before the third respondent, in pursuance of the direction issued on 13.4.2018 in various writ petitions referred to above. The impugned order records that as a result of quashing of the order impugned in the writ petition filed by the petitioners, there had been difficulty in disbursement of salary of teaching and other employees of the institution and therefore, during the interregnum, the dispute is settled, single operation of accounts has been directed.
In the opinion of the Court, since the impugned order is only an interim arrangement, during the period decision is taken and therefore, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the said order. However, as directed by order dated 13.4.2018, the dispute shall be decided by the third respondent within time frame fixed by the said order.
The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.) Order Date :- 29.5.2018 skv